该用户的聊天记录定位。
i have a feature flag in my system that moves to only nickel based pricing in preparation for the complete elimination of the penny
i have a feature flag in my system that moves to only nickel based pricing in preparation for the complete elimination of the penny
Is the primary subaccount usecase "I want to test something and limit its blast radius"?
Is the primary subaccount usecase "I want to test something and limit its blast radius"?
lol https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=7028398&__cf_chl_f_tk=LbwRlNeiyQFsFXdIbrb22ykk2RmGQf3D1X9OA77ftjA-1783021418-1.0.1.1-YFjOkLNari1kJuRptCpcDPKxb7ImExKuDghZOuSw5dY
lol https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=7028398&__cf_chl_f_tk=LbwRlNeiyQFsFXdIbrb22ykk2RmGQf3D1X9OA77ftjA-1783021418-1.0.1.1-YFjOkLNari1kJuRptCpcDPKxb7ImExKuDghZOuSw5dY
people on here seem to be having some success with a pennies in front of a steamroller strategy afaict 🙂
people on here seem to be having some success with a pennies in front of a steamroller strategy afaict 🙂
I'd doublecheck you aren't accidentally running the bot in multiple places, multiple accidental containiers, etc
I'd doublecheck you aren't accidentally running the bot in multiple places, multiple accidental containiers, etc
Yeah, lots of misleading stuff in there. I think the API responses could be treated as more authoritative
Yeah, lots of misleading stuff in there. I think the API responses could be treated as more authoritative
Feels like you answered your own question?
Feels like you answered your own question?
I think a lot of people get confused about selling something they don't have and being required to do something that looks like buying since they have an outflow of money when they do it. The way to think about selling, when you have no existing position, is that you are creating (writing) the contract for the event, selling the other side of that contract (the "yes side") for Xc and then providing collateral to the exchange for 1 - Xc and the exchange holds on to the Xc from the buyer to fully collateralize the contract. That collateral provision is why it looks like, for all intents and purposes, a "buy". The result of this would be your collateral is on the hook to pay out the buyer if the contract resolves as yes. If it resolves as no, you get the full collateral back at resolution.
I think a lot of people get confused about selling something they don't have and being required to do something that looks like buying since they have an outflow of money when they do it. The way to think about selling, when you have no existing position, is that you are creating (writing) the contract for the event, selling the other side of that contract (the "yes side") for Xc and then providing collateral to the exchange for 1 - Xc and the exchange holds on to the Xc from the buyer to fully collateralize the contract. That collateral provision is why it looks like, for all intents and purposes, a "buy". The result of this would be your collateral is on the hook to pay out the buyer if the contract resolves as yes. If it resolves as no, you get the full collateral back at resolution.
9
9
If you ask a question, refer to the actual parameters you want to send the API for the best chance at someone helping you. Don't use your internal code representtation.
If you ask a question, refer to the actual parameters you want to send the API for the best chance at someone helping you. Don't use your internal code representtation.
and I don't know what "1m" is but maybe that's a thing in whatever language you're using
and I don't know what "1m" is but maybe that's a thing in whatever language you're using
No one knows what yesBid.PriceDollars is
No one knows what yesBid.PriceDollars is
Yes, like I said, Kalshi cares about this because of infra limits. The people whining in here about "spammers" aren't Kalshi though.
Yes, like I said, Kalshi cares about this because of infra limits. The people whining in here about "spammers" aren't Kalshi though.
maybe some subtlety i'm missing about why it's bad otherwise
maybe some subtlety i'm missing about why it's bad otherwise
I don't understand how any of it is bad behavior. If someone literally never trades and is just trying to DDOS Kalshi, sure that's bad. But if someone is looking for mispricings and those are rare at the rate of about 1/10,000 seems fine to me
I don't understand how any of it is bad behavior. If someone literally never trades and is just trying to DDOS Kalshi, sure that's bad. But if someone is looking for mispricings and those are rare at the rate of about 1/10,000 seems fine to me
I'm only following this debate from afar but I don't understand the people complaining about the RFQ "spamming". The only reason an exchange would want to limit this is infra limits. Otherwise, they aren't "spamming", they are looking for mispricings and taking advantage of them. That's the whole point about market efficiency
I'm only following this debate from afar but I don't understand the people complaining about the RFQ "spamming". The only reason an exchange would want to limit this is infra limits. Otherwise, they aren't "spamming", they are looking for mispricings and taking advantage of them. That's the whole point about market efficiency
I get all the event_types enumerated in the docs for the market lifecyle stream. Whatever you're doing, you're somehow mixing streams on your end because the Market Positions stream has nothing to do with the lifecycle stream. You can't get the linked payload on the lifecycle stream.
I get all the event_types enumerated in the docs for the market lifecyle stream. Whatever you're doing, you're somehow mixing streams on your end because the Market Positions stream has nothing to do with the lifecycle stream. You can't get the linked payload on the lifecycle stream.
I don't know if that's an API order origination issue or a problem with everyone. My volume is relatively small, too, so it's not likely a trade volume issue.
I don't know if that's an API order origination issue or a problem with everyone. My volume is relatively small, too, so it's not likely a trade volume issue.
The Kalshi UI is insane, imo. The "Change (24h)" field has never been correct afaict.
The Kalshi UI is insane, imo. The "Change (24h)" field has never been correct afaict.
whoa C# jump scare. Trigger warning next time pls
whoa C# jump scare. Trigger warning next time pls
nw
nw
lol here I am getting worried
lol here I am getting worried
Anyway, seems mostly like a docs issue
Anyway, seems mostly like a docs issue
I don't really understand how Get Order could ever reasonably not return the status. Seems pretty fundamental
I don't really understand how Get Order could ever reasonably not return the status. Seems pretty fundamental
Weirdly Get Order also doesn't show a status being present
Weirdly Get Order also doesn't show a status being present
Possible that the order object definition here is linked to the create order endpoint return definition? Or just some kind of writer mistake
Possible that the order object definition here is linked to the create order endpoint return definition? Or just some kind of writer mistake
Depends how bad this would be for them in that it depends on how much people are relying on REST vs WS for their order tracking
Depends how bad this would be for them in that it depends on how much people are relying on REST vs WS for their order tracking
Some statuses can't be inferred afaict so it would require an API call to fill in.
Some statuses can't be inferred afaict so it would require an API call to fill in.
It would be extremely strange to remove it.
It would be extremely strange to remove it.
Just came to say I'm receiving it as well
Just came to say I'm receiving it as well
I don't rely on the status field for much so not certain
I don't rely on the status field for much so not certain
I'll look to see if anything active is actually missing that or if it's a docs issue
I'll look to see if anything active is actually missing that or if it's a docs issue
My code assumes a status field so it must have been there before
My code assumes a status field so it must have been there before
Just out of curiosity, no ask for alpha, but what is the theme of the 3M markets that you trade in?
Just out of curiosity, no ask for alpha, but what is the theme of the 3M markets that you trade in?
If you're asking, you probably don't have access to FIX
If you're asking, you probably don't have access to FIX
Yeesh, that error looks so clear so if it's for anything else wtf
Yeesh, that error looks so clear so if it's for anything else wtf
Hard to know from their logs what the underlying code is doing. Their first log line says that it is is and the error would be very weird if it wasn't
Hard to know from their logs what the underlying code is doing. Their first log line says that it is is and the error would be very weird if it wasn't
You can fix it by making sure that the order you placed is small enough at the given price to execute. fill or kill fails if there isn't enough resting volume on the exchange for your order to execute entirely.
You can fix it by making sure that the order you placed is small enough at the given price to execute. fill or kill fails if there isn't enough resting volume on the exchange for your order to execute entirely.
Probably they are okay on this point if the users are still able to use the UI, though, for the same functionality
Probably they are okay on this point if the users are still able to use the UI, though, for the same functionality
fun find
fun find
I'd write it at 25
I'd write it at 25
Can there be a "no dick measuring contest" rule? FWIW, on the ban front, if I were implementing the ban, I would absolutely not tell the banned people they are banned. Much better for you all, from Kalshi's perspective, to not know so you don't attempt to skirt it. Given the Kalshi devs are silent on this and one user said they ran the exact same code on a different account with success, I'm pretty confident it's real
Can there be a "no dick measuring contest" rule? FWIW, on the ban front, if I were implementing the ban, I would absolutely not tell the banned people they are banned. Much better for you all, from Kalshi's perspective, to not know so you don't attempt to skirt it. Given the Kalshi devs are silent on this and one user said they ran the exact same code on a different account with success, I'm pretty confident it's real
and provided $1 of collateral to the exchange
and provided $1 of collateral to the exchange
meant to be to Noah
meant to be to Noah
5ms would be exceptional AFIACT with the REST endpoints
5ms would be exceptional AFIACT with the REST endpoints
You sure you're measuring that right?
You sure you're measuring that right?
They're still sending it as of ~1min ago. Someone should tell the changelog maintainer that updates to the changelog don't update the codebase
They're still sending it as of ~1min ago. Someone should tell the changelog maintainer that updates to the changelog don't update the codebase
Friendly suggestion that a hook on the market and event lifecycle stream to monitor for markets closing/deactivating/etc -> unsubscribe can help keep your subscription tracking clean
Friendly suggestion that a hook on the market and event lifecycle stream to monitor for markets closing/deactivating/etc -> unsubscribe can help keep your subscription tracking clean
always
always
1) usually the first team is the away team in the ticker and second is home. 2) If you need to use the ticker to figure out who is home and who is away in a game, just remember you are swimming with sharks here
1) usually the first team is the away team in the ticker and second is home. 2) If you need to use the ticker to figure out who is home and who is away in a game, just remember you are swimming with sharks here
Kalshi